2026-07-18T13:56:15Zhttps://docta.ucm.es/rest/oai/request

oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/135682024-09-02T17:59:55Zcom_20.500.14352_14col_20.500.14352_15

00925njm 22002777a 4500 dc Schweitzer, A. author Passegger, V.M: author Cifuentes, C. author Béjar, V.J.S. author Cortés Contreras, Miriam author Caballero, J. A. author Burgo, C. del author Czesla, S. author Kürster, M. author Montes Gutiérrez, David author Zapatero Osorio, M.R. author Ribas, I. author Reiners, A. author Quirrenbach, A. author Amado, P.J. author Aceituno, J. author Anglada Escudé, G. author Bauer, F.F. author Dreizler, S. author Jeffers, S.V. author Guenther, E.W. author Henning, T. author Kaminski, A. author Lafarga, M. author Marfil, E. author Morales, J.C. author Schmitt, J.H.M.M. author Seifert, W. author Solano, E. author Tabernero, H.M. author Zechmeister, M. author 2019-05 Aims. We determine the radii and masses of 293 nearby, bright M dwarfs of the CARMENES survey. This is the first time that such a large and homogeneous high-resolution (R > 80, 000) spectroscopic survey has been used to derive these fundamental stellar parameters. Methods. We derived the radii using Stefan-Boltzmann’s law. We obtained the required effective temperatures T_(eff) from a spectral analysis and we obtained the required luminosities L from integrated broadband photometry together with the Gaia DR2 parallaxes. The mass was then determined using a mass-radius relation that we derived from eclipsing binaries known in the literature. We compared this method with three other methods: (1) We calculated the mass from the radius and the surface gravity log g, which was obtained from the same spectral analysis as T_(eff). (2) We used a widely used infrared mass-magnitude relation. (3) We used a Bayesian approach to infer stellar parameters from the comparison of the absolute magnitudes and colors of our targets with evolutionary models. Results. Between spectral types M0 V and M7 V our radii cover the range 0.1 Rꙩ < R < 0.6 Rꙩ with an error of 2–3% and our masses cover 0.09 Mꙩ < M < 0.6 Mꙩ with an error of 3–5%. We find good agreement between the masses determined with these different methods for most of our targets. Only the masses of very young objects show discrepancies. This can be well explained with the assumptions that we used for our methods. 1432-0746 10.1051/0004-6361/201834965 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/13568 http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201834965 https://www.aanda.org https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.03231 The CARMENES search for exoplanets around M dwarfs: different roads to radii and masses of the target stars